Delegates
from 127 countries formally voted approval of the Stockholm Convention
on Persistent Organic Pollutants on 22 May 2001, in Stockholm,
Sweden. After the vote, ministerial representatives of on behalf
of their governments.

The
Convention now returns to each government for ratification. 50 countries
must ratify the treaty for it to become international law. It is
expected that this will take approximately 5 years.

In
a ceremony at the White House on 19 April 2001, George W. Bush voiced
his support for ratification of the Convention by the U.S. Senate.

The
Stockholm Convention commits nations that ratify the treaty to work toward
of elimination of some of the world's most dangerous chemicals, immediately
or as a long-term goal.

Speaking
during the opening session at the meeting, Swedish Prime Minister
Goran Persson observed that "The prohibition and elimination
of 12 of the most harmful chemicals is a first step toward controlling
the absolutely most dangerous chemicals.'' He went on to argue "we
have to go further. Dangerous substances must be replaced by harmless
ones step by step. If there is the least suspicion that new chemicals
have dangerous characteristics it is better to reject them.''

The
initial chemicals
targeted by the convention are widely acknowledged to be hazardous
to human health and the environment, because of their toxicity, because
they resist degradation and thus persist for decades or longer, because
they become concentrated in living tissue, and because they are transported
globally by atmospheric and oceanic currents, and other transport modes.

Each
of the initial 12 chemicals targeted by the convention is a proven endocrine
disrupting compound.

POPs
have become ubiquitous contaminants of fish, dairy products, and other
foods around the world. One or more POPs chemicals are detectable in virtually
every living organism, and many people around the world now carry enough
POPs in their body fat to raise concern about serious health problems,
including reproductive and developmental problems, cancer and immune system
disruption.

What
happened in Stockholm?

The
collection
of nations formally participating under the auspices of the UN in the
negotiation process (more...)
first reached agreement on a few remaining disputes about language. These
were text passages in the Convention that remained in dispute despite
over 2 years negotiation.

The
final debate was over what steps could be taken in the future to begin
considering other chemicals as targets of the Convention, beyond the first
twelve covered explicitly by the treaty. The US and its allies argued
that no formal steps under the auspices of the Convention should be taken
on this key issue until ratification is achieved. Specifically, the US
opposed allowing the POPs Review Committee from gathering or evaluating
data on potential new POPs chemicals until the Convention is ratified
by at least 50 nations.

The
European Union, in contrast, proposed that the process of information-gathering
should begin as candidate chemicals are identified. The EU preferred this
approach because it wished to speed up the process. Under the US's proposal
(which was fronted by the G-77 nations after strong US lobbying behind
the scenes), it is unlikely that any new chemicals will be included formally
and thus identified for banning for at least a decade.

In
the final moments of debate, faced with the choice of losing key elements
of the treaty that defined the general process of including new chemicals
or backing down on their position about timing, the EU agreed to the US
proposal

Throughout
the entire negotiations, the EU proved far more progressive and precautionary
in its negotiating positions than did the United States. This final
concession, forced by the US, consigns the treaty to focusing on old chemicals
that lack, to a large degree, any strong economic constituency because
for the most part the targeted chemicals are already banned or heavily
regulated in the developed world. The treaty is still immensely valuable,
especially because of the economic assistance it will bring to developing
countries attempting to manage hazardous chemicals, but it could, and
should, have been far more supportive of public health.

The
agreement reached on these points resolved the last remaining disputes
about specific language within the Convention. Afterward, ministerial
representatives from participating governments signed the Convention on
behalf of their governments. EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman represented
the United States.

What
does the Convention do?

It
bans outright 8 pesticides - aldrin, endrin, dieldrin, chlordane, heptachlor,
hexachlorobenzene, mirex, and toxaphene. The bans will take effect as
soon as the new treaty enters into force, which is expected within 5
years.

It
establishes a long-term goal of eliminating DDT use but permits public
health exceptions for its use in mosquito control to fight malaria.
Developing countries without alternatives will continue to use DDT against
malaria, until effective, and affordable alternatives are available
to them.

It
immediately prohibits PCB (polychlorinated biphenyl) production and
mandates a phase-out of ongoing uses over time. With a goal of complete
PCB phaseout by 2025, the treaty calls on countries to make determined
efforts to remove from use all PCB-containing electrical transformers
and other equipment.

It
promotes concerted action to minimize the release of industrial by-product
POPs like dioxins. The treaty states that the aim of these actions is
the ultimate elimination of by-product POPs where feasible.

It
emphasizes preventive measures to address POPs at their source. The
treaty encourages national regulations to prevent development of new
chemicals with POPs characteristics, and promotes changes in industrial
materials, processes, and products that can create POPs.

It
establishes the means and mechanisms to assist developing counties eliminate
POPs. The agreement will channel funds and technical assistance from
developed countries to their less developed partners, thus enabling
these countries to take effective action under the treaty.

It
takes a precautionary approach for identifying and acting against chemicals
with POPs characteristics. This involves establishment of a scientific
"POPs Review Committee" to evaluate additional chemicals -
based on the criteria of toxicity, persistence, bioaccumulation, and
long-range transport - for inclusion in the treaty. Acknowledging the
need for precaution, it states that "lack of full scientific certainty
shall not prevent" a POP from being included. On the other hand,
as noted above, US lobbying delayed the work of the POPs Review Committee
until the treaty comes into force with ratification by 50 countries.